In public, you have no right to privacy. Show us your tits, then.
Tracking criminals and terrorists so that they can't as easily get away from law enforcement. This is the image of four suicide bombers before they blew up the London subway. I could write a thousand words to explain how a camera offers absolutely no protection whatsoever, but you can see for yourself that these are just four guys getting on a subway, they aren't walking around in a sandwich board that reads "we are miscreants on our way to do misdeeds".
The camera cannot prevent anything, it can only watch things happening. You can track someone you know who's out and about. Say, a political opponent, for instance. Or track a special kind of person, like college girls in miniskirts, most likely. But you can't track someone you don't know, doing something you can't guess, in the middle of millions of others, doing apparently the same thing. It may give you warm fuzzy feelings of a benevolent all-seeing eye, but it's nothing more than a tool putting the many under the thumbs of the few.
This little exercise seems to violate the intent of Fair Use pretty much in every way. From the illegal use of the Disney logo (with animation and music) to the repeated and unnecessary use of actual Disney dialog and video, it seems that the creator missed the point entirely. Maybe if you, I dunno, listened to the words he spliced, you'd know that you're completely, unmitigatedly, and utterly wrong? In every way, shape, form and intent.
It's educational, non-profit, and only uses small portions of copyrighted works to make it's point. If that's not fair use, then snalshdot isn't a website.
There is no law stopping them, thus no government control of their speech, and that makes it not a free speech issue. So if someone is rich enough to silence any dissenting viewpoint from his, he's not infringing on their free speech because he's not the governement?
I'm sorry, but no. If something is wrong when the power is political, it is also wrong when the power is financial.
So concisely, this isn't a free speech issue because Opie and Anthony still have the right to say what they want, just not wherever they want to say it. It is a free speech issue because if what they said cannot be said on public airwaves, and it cannot be said on private airwaves, then it cannot be said on the air at all.
United States In North America, there are two satellite radio companies, XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio. These two former rivals have announced their intention to merge, which would create a single satellite radio entity in the United States with nearly 14 million subscribers.
was just addressing the common leftist "See France is perfect happy anti-war funland!" [...] all the lefties cry about how ignorant that is and horrible and yada yada yada. But God forbid you disagree with ANY leftist stuff, [..] don't swallow left wing or right wing groupthink Tell me more about "lefties", and how you don't swallow groupthink.
We need to have a source of reliable cheap electricity to make the aluminum. And we don't at this time. What?!?
Hydroelectricity, a renewable resource, is the most important source of energy for producing primary aluminium. About 60 per cent of the world's primary aluminium is already being produced with the help of hydroelectric power.
The reason XM suspended the show is mainly out of financial self interest; they were afraid that if it seemed like they condoned this type of behavior they would be sued, and they are probably right. "The opinions and ideas expressed by crazy drunken hobos are theirs and theirs alone. Neither XM nor it's management shares these ideas and opinions. Now, on to the quasi-coherant rants of inebriated vagrants..."
Free speech is not merely the absence of censorship. That is why we built the Web in the first place.
Gee, I always thought that we built the web so physicists could more easily collaborate and exchange data at CERN and other laboratories. They're using HTTP to exchange physics data? No wonder I can't buy a MrFusion yet.
This is certainly not a troll. Corporate censors need only answer to their customers. The Dixie Chicks are the perfect example. They made comments that offended people, those people stopped buying records. Radio stations stopped playing them because people were mad at them. You only got one thing right, the Dixie Chicks are a perfect example of corporate censorship aimed at stifling freedom of speech: http://www.nbc6.net/entertainment/2185232/detail.h tml Country station KKCS, in Colorado Springs, has suspended two of its disc jockeys for putting the Chicks back on the air, in violation of a ban imposed after the group criticized President George W. Bush. Lead singer Natalie Maines said during a March concert in London that she was "ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas." [...] "We pulled their music two months ago, and it's been a difficult decision because how can you ignore the hottest group in country music?" station manager Jerry Grant told The Gazette newspaper.
They pulled one of their most popular acts from the air because they didn't like their unwillingness to accept the war stance of the Bush administration as unquestionable truth. It wasn't for profit, it wasn't because the fans stopped listening, it was because they spoke freely.
the same people that made Saddam very rich and enabled him to crush his own people. Donald Rumsfeld and Ronald Reagan: On November 1 1983, the secretary of state, George Shultz, was passed intelligence reports of "almost daily use of CW [chemical weapons]" by Iraq. However, 25 days later, Ronald Reagan signed a secret order instructing the administration to do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq losing the war. In December Mr Rumsfeld, hired by President Reagan to serve as a Middle East troubleshooter, met Saddam Hussein in Baghdad and passed on the US willingness to help his regime and restore full diplomatic relations.
It fascinates me that this is framed as a "Free Speech" issue. The airwaves that XM uses aren't of the public variety, it has nothing to do with constitutional amendments. It's sad that you think that freedom of speech is something limited to the jurisdiction of the U.S. government.
You confuse the document clarifying it's legality with the concept itself. You need to learn the difference.
So, is making jokes about rape on national radio "right"? Ohhh, some people don't like you to talk like that. Ohh, some people like to shut you up for saying those things. You know that. Lots of people. Lots of groups in this country want to tell you how to talk. Tell you what you can't talk about. Well, sometimes they'll say, well you can talk about something but you can't joke about it. Say you can't joke about something because it's not funny. Comedians run into that shit all the time. Like rape. They'll say, "you can't joke about rape. Rape's not funny." I say, "fuck you, I think it's hilarious. How do you like that?" I can prove to you that rape is funny. Picture Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd. See, hey why do you think they call him "Porky," eh?
tell them, those other people (who don't count as much as we), what they can and can't do with their property. They're allowed to censor their programming if they choose to, and their customers are allowed to massively cancel their subscription when they do.
You should, however, learn the meaning of the words you use.
Of course the same things were being said about Clinton when he was in office. There was a card game with a card for "political puppet" with Bill as a puppet and Hilary pulling the strings. The smear campaign changed tone when it turned out he wasn't whipped... something about cigars... anyway, I thought he, his supporters, and his detractors were tools from "I did not inhale"; because the crime is holding the joint, not enjoying the high.
Nice of you to come up with a "but Clinton" argument though, what would a mention of Bush be without you bots replying with that, huh?
It's hardly a censorship issue. It is the very definition of censorship.
Main Entry: 2censor Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): censored; censoring/'sen(t)-s&-ri[ng], 'sen(t)s-ri[ng]/ : to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>
Some people think that bad things can only be done by governments, and that when those bad things are done by corporations, they aren't bad things at all, even though the act is the same. I don't know why you think like that, but you're wrong. So, so wrong.
Believe any negative report about the US government
Understand that no good whatsoever can come of US involvement in the Middle East
but they still want us to somehow vote for candidates that promise extend government meddling in areas such as retirement and health care.
Hm. Not as flexible with these mental gymnastics as I used to be. Request additional kool-aid here. Extend government medling in health care? This from the country that spends the most per-capita on healthcare in the entire world, yet still has 20% uninsured?
Maybe if you spent your taxes on healthcare instead of on no-bid contracts to haliburton? No? That's not an option?
he is at the same time the dumbest president alive that was able to conspire and outsmart Why is there people in this world unfamiliar with the concept of a "front man"? You really think the Bush Administration is a one-man show?
I'm not sure it's fair to call him a "bad kind of conservative," [...] we BETTER be "rich enough" because there's a lot of money that needs to be spent doing one or the other, and in reality both. The "bad" is because his conservatism is applied to the existing money funnels. "We" could be just as rich putting that money and effort in the renewable energies rather than in coal and oil, but then the money wouldn't be going to the same pockets where it is going now.
The idea that there are huge organizations of scientists where there is powerful and overwhelming consensus about ANYTHING as unsettled as 'Global Warming' is ludicrous. So you're saying that they are made up? Wow. How did that kool aid taste?
Well, at the time, it was called New France, and not Canada. # from 1608 to 1627 and 1632 to 1763, it was capital of French Canada and all of New France, # from 1791 to 1841, it was the capital of the Province of Lower Canada, # from 1849 to 1865, it was capital of the Province of Canada,
Read the fucking links before you reply to them. Then go pick up a history book thicker than an inch.
And you're a retard, it seems. Because you can't grasp the difference between "not contributing global warming to SUVs and farting" and "denying global warming exists". 1- Deny it until the evidence is overwhelming. 2- Deny you had anything to do with it.
And I hate intelligent design idea or advocates. And I think global warming has nothing to do with us (or our actions). So where do I fit, you genius? You fit in the "abrasive idiot, most likely a troll" section of my red dots.
Slashdot Mirror
I could write a thousand words to explain how a camera offers absolutely no protection whatsoever, but you can see for yourself that these are just four guys getting on a subway, they aren't walking around in a sandwich board that reads "we are miscreants on our way to do misdeeds".
The camera cannot prevent anything, it can only watch things happening.
You can track someone you know who's out and about. Say, a political opponent, for instance. Or track a special kind of person, like college girls in miniskirts, most likely. But you can't track someone you don't know, doing something you can't guess, in the middle of millions of others, doing apparently the same thing. It may give you warm fuzzy feelings of a benevolent all-seeing eye, but it's nothing more than a tool putting the many under the thumbs of the few.
It's educational, non-profit, and only uses small portions of copyrighted works to make it's point. If that's not fair use, then snalshdot isn't a website.
I'm sorry, but no. If something is wrong when the power is political, it is also wrong when the power is financial.
United States
In North America, there are two satellite radio companies, XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio. These two former rivals have announced their intention to merge, which would create a single satellite radio entity in the United States with nearly 14 million subscribers.
Hydroelectricity, a renewable resource, is the most important source of energy for producing primary aluminium. About 60 per cent of the world's primary aluminium is already being produced with the help of hydroelectric power.
Gee, I always thought that we built the web so physicists could more easily collaborate and exchange data at CERN and other laboratories. They're using HTTP to exchange physics data?
No wonder I can't buy a MrFusion yet.
http://www.nbc6.net/entertainment/2185232/detail.
Country station KKCS, in Colorado Springs, has suspended two of its disc jockeys for putting the Chicks back on the air, in violation of a ban imposed after the group criticized President George W. Bush.
Lead singer Natalie Maines said during a March concert in London that she was "ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas."
[...]
"We pulled their music two months ago, and it's been a difficult decision because how can you ignore the hottest group in country music?" station manager Jerry Grant told The Gazette newspaper.
They pulled one of their most popular acts from the air because they didn't like their unwillingness to accept the war stance of the Bush administration as unquestionable truth. It wasn't for profit, it wasn't because the fans stopped listening, it was because they spoke freely.
On November 1 1983, the secretary of state, George Shultz, was passed intelligence reports of "almost daily use of CW [chemical weapons]" by Iraq.
However, 25 days later, Ronald Reagan signed a secret order instructing the administration to do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq losing the war.
In December Mr Rumsfeld, hired by President Reagan to serve as a Middle East troubleshooter, met Saddam Hussein in Baghdad and passed on the US willingness to help his regime and restore full diplomatic relations.
You confuse the document clarifying it's legality with the concept itself. You need to learn the difference.
-George Carlin
You should, however, learn the meaning of the words you use.
The smear campaign changed tone when it turned out he wasn't whipped... something about cigars... anyway, I thought he, his supporters, and his detractors were tools from "I did not inhale"; because the crime is holding the joint, not enjoying the high.
Nice of you to come up with a "but Clinton" argument though, what would a mention of Bush be without you bots replying with that, huh?
Some people think that bad things can only be done by governments, and that when those bad things are done by corporations, they aren't bad things at all, even though the act is the same.
I don't know why you think like that, but you're wrong. So, so wrong.
but they still want us to somehow vote for candidates that promise extend government meddling in areas such as retirement and health care.
Hm. Not as flexible with these mental gymnastics as I used to be. Request additional kool-aid here. Extend government medling in health care?
This from the country that spends the most per-capita on healthcare in the entire world, yet still has 20% uninsured?
Maybe if you spent your taxes on healthcare instead of on no-bid contracts to haliburton? No? That's not an option?
You really think the Bush Administration is a one-man show?
What I'm wondering is why go after the intermediate? That's the BILLION DOLLAR question.
"We" could be just as rich putting that money and effort in the renewable energies rather than in coal and oil, but then the money wouldn't be going to the same pockets where it is going now.
# from 1791 to 1841, it was the capital of the Province of Lower Canada,
# from 1849 to 1865, it was capital of the Province of Canada,
Read the fucking links before you reply to them. Then go pick up a history book thicker than an inch.
Because you can't grasp the difference between "not contributing global warming to SUVs and farting" and "denying global warming exists". 1- Deny it until the evidence is overwhelming.
2- Deny you had anything to do with it. And I hate intelligent design idea or advocates. And I think global warming has nothing to do with us (or our actions). So where do I fit, you genius? You fit in the "abrasive idiot, most likely a troll" section of my red dots.